Pneumatic-Based Trash Disposal System Eyed in NYC

Researchers in New York City are studying the idea of creating a pneumatic-tube-based trash disposal system that will transport waste out of the city through a system of tubes.

The proposal by researchers at the University Transportation Research Center (UTRC) at the City University of New York envisions a series of tubes, both underground and above ground, to take solid waste out of the city, eliminating the bag-and-truck-based system the city uses now. The idea was covered in a feasibility study researchers at the organization put together.

New York City already has such a pneumatic tube-based system on Roosevelt Island, a planned community in the East River that opened in 1975, Benjamin Miller, a senior research fellow for freight programs at the UTRC and former director of policy planning for the New York City Department of Sanitation, told Design News. There are also hundreds of pneumatic tube-based waste disposal systems in other parts of the world, including the Spanish cities of Barcelona and Seville, Paris, and the Wembley part of London, said Miller, who co-authored the feasibility study.

The initial locations for the system in New York would be in two places. One would be to install the tube along part of the under-construction Second Avenue subway line between 92nd and 96th streets, while the other would be an installation as part of the supporting framework of the High Line, an elevated city park on the city's west side in the Chelsea neighborhood. The Second Avenue section would service buildings in that area, while the High Line section of the system would remove waste from the park itself as well as the Chelsea Market building, which is home to hundreds of businesses, Miller told us.

The idea is to install the system incrementally and connect the pipes like Legos, since installing a system citywide would be cost-prohibitively expensive, Miller said. "The system would be a series of small systems about a mile or so long and then you snap them all together like Legos," he told us. "To build it all at once would be like building sewers if New York never had them, which would cost hundreds of billions of dollars."

Mechanically, the system works like this: People in a building or on the street in a certain area deposit waste in various bins, or “inlets," with a reservoir at the bottom that connect to a pneumatic tube. There will be separate inlets for different kinds of waste, including different types of recyclable material, organic waste, and household refuse.

The waste is dropped into a reservoir at the bottom of the inlet that is connected to a pneumatically powered trunk tube with a fan that pulls air at a speed of 60 miles per hour, Miller explained. When the reservoir is full, a valve is opened from a control point at a central terminal and suctions the waste into the terminal for separation and eventual disposal through a large container that is picked up by a truck and deposited at a landfill or other disposal facility.

In an urban area like New York, the pneumatic tube would eliminate a lot of the pollution, costs, and other negative aspects of the current waste-disposal system, Miller said:

Garbage trucks are an enormous part of the problem. Moving that stuff is expensive, and there are a lot of problems associated with trucks like fuel, noise, odors, and traffic congestion. This avoids all of those obvious economic, environmental, and quality of life issues, and makes the overall system easier to manage.

Now that Miller and his colleagues have concluded the idea is feasible, they are looking for a contractor to build the system. "It is feasible, operationally, economically, and there are environmental benefits," he said. "Now we need to find someone who is willing to agree to do this and pay the upfront operating costs."

Each of the branch systems proposed would cost about $10 million to $11 million to build. The Second Avenue system would transport about 20 tons of waste out of the city, while the High Line system would transfer about 10 tons. However, there is the possibility to transfer much more waste, as these targeted areas and amounts were considered for the sake of the study, Miller said.

Tool_maker brings up a good point. How do you keep people from stuffing any thing they do not want into the system. My understanding is the garbage is placed into canisters that are then sent down the tubes. But has anyone noticed how dumpsters are some times stuffed with couches, televisions, or broken chairs? How is recycling handled? Seperate canisters that get routed down seperate tubes? Hazardous wastes?

To some degree, though they are far from perfect, the sanitation workers have the option to leave the crap that is not allowed on people's front door.

As far as maintenance, Design News has covered a lot of robots that can fit into tubes and pipes. These would be the tools used for tube checking and un-clogging duty.

I like the concept of using robots to unclogged the pipes. Design News has written many articles on snake like robots that could easily manuever and clean the inside of pipes. Seems like a new industry for waste disposal and management systems might be born with this proposed New York system.

That's a good idea, mrdon, and you're right, there are robots capable of this. I think one thing at a time, though! It might be difficult enough to get the pneumatic trash system in place, let alone introduce robots into it! But it's good to be thinking ahead like this.

I see your point, GTOLover, but I think maybe the size of the bins would preclude anyone from stuffing unwanted items down there. But I'm not sure. And as I said in a previous comment, the robot search teams are a great idea if this system was put into place.

I think you're right, JimT, and as another reader pointed out, there would probably be a big backlash from labor unions on this worried about lost jobs--they would definitely try to find a way to either block or supplement jobs somehow, which would demand negotiations, compromises and definitely stall the project. I know what you mean about people showing resistance--it's a bit frustrating, but I guess I understand, since it's something new and unknown, and people often fear what they don't know. Also, it's not surprising people with sanitation jobs in the old system might worry about what would happen to them in a new system.

@GTOlover: Of course you are correct about the robotic maintenance and I am embarassed that I did not think of that. There are millions of miles of pipe lines that are maintained thusly.

Your point about recycling is a good one. Today many people do not recycle because it is too much trouble. Another problem could be, "Yard Waste". We have to keep it separate in the St. Louis area and when leaves are falling or spring grass is being cut, my yard waste outnumbers regular trash cans 8-1. I have a big yard and that may not be an issue in New York.

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, your absolutely correct about taking continuous improvement steps for the Pneumatic Based Trash Disposal System. Its better to develop the system in chucks(subsystems) as opposed to the complete build. It minimizes systems errors as well as NRE (Non-Recurring Enginering) costs.

While at first this sounds fascinating, like Tool_maker I also have concerns about cost/payback, as well as maintenance and just plain practicality. In some places, like highly urbanized NYC, it might make more sense than others. It's true we've covered many snake-like robots that could do the maintenance, but they're not at all cheap: quite the opposite. They're also not past prototypes in most cases. In any event, adding robots to this system seems to me like unnecessary complexity.

GTO, sorting waste would be fairly simple, since each type of refuse would have a specific bin. Then the master control station could select dumping all of the glass bottle bins at one time, all of the plastic trash bins at another time, and even yard waste at a specific time. It would be similar to the pipelines used for the transport of different materials. It would not be 100% perfect but it could certainly provide a good amount of separation quite easily. And why use a robot to unclog the pipes when there are already in existance all kinds of pipe unclogging technologies. It is not a new science, you know.

I agree with most of what you're saying, Ann. I hear what everyone else is saying about concerns, too, but I think it is workable, but one thing at a time, like I said before. Let's see if the system can work incrementally and then maybe someday robots can get in there. But you're right, it would all be too complex all at once to introduce such a big idea.

If a major catastrophe strikes your area, will you be prepared? Do you know how to modify the tech you've already got or MacGyver what you need to fit your own situation? A free, five-day Continuing Education Center course starting April 6 will show you how.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.